Skip to main content
2:30 am
parcels i have, this affordable housing and land dedication has created an entitled parcel and this will come or could conceivablely come on line sooner, provided that we have the funds to do so. i think that in terms of the question that the context and how, the affordable housing would relate to this surrounding buildings. i think that we have a wonderful tract record of utilizing very talented architects who take that into consideration, including the architect of record on the 801 brannan site and really hope, and not hope, but we really do expect that anything that is designed on the affordable housing parcel will be in context with this, with what is being designed, for the not only for these other two parcels but for the balance of the neighborhood. and i think that the track record of our affordable housing developers have indicated that they could do
2:31 am
that and do that successfully. in terms of the numbers of units on site. we will clearly you know, try to achieve the greatest number of units because that makes the greatest sense for us in terms of the economy of scale in terms of the particular development and so our goal will be to try to achieve the limit that you are authorizing at 150 for the site. and on that particular site. and that will be part of the request for proposals. and the i think that the only question, is really the question of timing in terms of the pipeline and you know all of the competing needs from on the housing trust fund but they are clearly very interested in this neighborhood. we don't have affordable housing in this immediate neighborhood now. we think that affordable housing is a public benefit that should be shared with all
2:32 am
neighborhoods of san francisco and so we look forward to developing it on the site. >> thank you for that comment, as far as the architecture goes, i think that the skillfulness on how both projects are presented to including the detail and does not really require anything in common, the one that i think that i hope and if you want to ask to please come to the podium, normally, we cannot obligate, the execution of the project based on what we see skillfully presented to you here today. what we are approving today is an entitlement, but we are not improving the architecture as we see it or the continued use of the architects, as the project moves into potential ownership,; is that correct?? >> could you rephrase the question? >> i am asking you, as you are basically potentially being integrated absorbed bought by and i don't have the proper
2:33 am
description. the thoughtfulness by when you have deliberate and this project through will be going through someone else what obligations do they have or will there be obligated to deliver it as we are approving it today. >> i think that the value that the buyers of the project associated with the site has to do with the work that has been done to date and you don't necessarily get market rents for a project that looks, feels, acts and, behaves differently than what we have proposed. i have not reason to believe that the buyers have any intent to change the direction especially difn the fact that they have reviewed the plans as they exist. i have no legal capacity with which to enforce any of that as
2:34 am
you guys know but every conversation that we have had leads them to believe that they are interested in leaving where we left off as opposed to changing the direction or the team. >> that just seems to want to... >> thank you. >> one of the things that when the project comes in for permits, the zoning administrator will have to make a call that property ject in front of us for permits is subsan shally in compliance with what they approve. they don't have to hire the same project but the over all bulk in the size of the building and the over all plan will have to be the same as to what you approved today. they could hire a different architect but i think that i would argue that the site plan in particular changes, we would bring it back to the commission. that does not mean that the architecture would not be different, but, the bulk and the shape and the over all size of the building would have to largely be the same as what you would approve. otherwise we will bring it back to you. >> i mean, i would agree with
2:35 am
the public comment. what we are approving today has so many subtleties by which this project comes one out of the thinking of the eastern neighborhood and a tremendous effort which into this and now seeing it for the first time realized in the form that it is and the form that is being asked for approval today, kind of almost makes me want to fall in love with it and say this is what i want to be relating to in the future, and to have the uncertainty, unfortunately of the fact that we are moving on is not necessarily that comforting to me. sorry about that one. leaves us a little bit here on the hot seat. because i have to tell the director and i cannot unfortunately not mention the project. we are entitled a smaller project, 8 months ago only that i heard from the architect that the entitlement was taken and passed into something else. >> and i cannot unfortunately
2:36 am
say what the project is but that happens. >> i am concerned that a project of that magnitude, could create major disappointments if it is not delivered with the subtleties that we are seeing today, i just have to say it. >> it sounds like a conducting agreement or an opportunity for yours truly. >> commissioner wu? >> thank you. >> so i want to thank the project sponsor for his presentation and i think about being up front about the issues on the concourse, if i could say it this way i feel cautiously optimistic for this project. and i like to thank director lee for the explanation of the on site or the land dedication. so for me the larger question is around building new units and meeting the larger goals of eastern neighborhoods and are we on the path to meeting our goals are we not? and i feel like, the fact that
2:37 am
there are the potentials for 205 or 206 is great. does it put too much burden on the city or the pipeline and take money away from other projects that might be in the pipeline for those moneys. i think some what similar parallel feelings about the retail and this, the agreement is really great. i think thinking about how to actually get working class folks from the neighborhoods that are in san francisco right now into jobs or into job opportunities or owning their own small business. i also hope that that does not change if and when the zone is sold. but, the rest of the retail i assume will be fairly high-end, market rate retail and i have the conversations with the director about this and i just cannot help but feel like san francisco is becoming so fancy and high end and everything is just becoming like a playground
2:38 am
for people that are coming here to work in high-tech and maybe to work in other industries, but we are making some of these decisions based on what we are seeing with the ab, and the singa and it is not responding to what is existing in the city right now. that said, i do think that this project has been developed in good faith. i think that the developer has done a good job of responding to community concerns and community needs. i actually really like the design at 801 brannan, i can't believe what it is, but it looks different than what we have been seeing, it responds to that rounded corner. it feels san franciscoan to me and i do like that. and i think that is my comments for now. >> thank you commissioner. >> gordon? >> i think that i share what some have shared the support
2:39 am
for the project as we see today and the hope for the remaining very similar in the future and we ask that when this psych permit is issued that we are before the project you know gets its permit that we can have it back to us to see and we have done that in the past where the director shared with us the new designs and plans, and i think that it is innovative and the land dedication and the on site affordable and having a former board member and aware of the challenges that that organization has faced with the brick and mortar space and hope that it be a model. some of those merchants could actually live in that area. i am familiar with the concourse and i am doing a large gala, i was sad when we picked the space we didn't know what it was going to be demolished and i understand the
2:40 am
point to that. not to say that we would not have used the concourse, but that could be a place that we could use it in the future, it is unfortunate that was a place to know if they were selecting that site this year or last year and this could be the final year and it is regrettable. it is a very large, kind of warehouse spait and it is not worth preserving but it is one of those spaces of the type and size in the city. but it is primarily used for a lot of big events because there are not a lot of big spaces for those sort of events. it is regrettable and it is not this project sponsor's fault for the concourse not letting people snow but what is regrettable. i am in support of property ject as well. i don't know if where you are in your talks are being bought
2:41 am
out i actually got a text while you guys were asking me questions. we are going to build it as we designed it. >> great. >> so everybody can. >> so they are watching and they are paying attention. that is good. i mean for the future reference, and i don't know how they have in the pipeline in the immediate future, but if i were the buyers i would show up to talk about the plans because i think that it would help a lot of things >> commissioners. >> oh, i would say hi to the new owners there. >> any way, i guess that it is the sentiment of the commission that it is a good project. both of them and nobody has made a motion and i am going to go ahead and make a motion based on the comments so far. to approve the project with conditions. >> second. >> reference, thank you.
2:42 am
>> and referencing both introduction paragraphs, and outlined in bold referencing the various conditions and exemptions and also that we have found the findings and the mid gaysing reports relating to the california environmental act. >> commissioner, and the project sponsor, i think that this is mentioned in the report, but although, many of the units are planned for initially for rental, everything is condo mapped and built to the standards that would allow it to be a condo because i think that these have to be built to different standards if i am not mistaken. >> thank you. >> on that motion,
2:43 am
commissioners to approve projects 801 brannan. and adams. >> moore, aye. >> sugaya. >> wu. >> aye. commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> it passes 6 to 0. >> commissioners. >> do you want to take a very short break? >> yeah. >> we are going to commissioners are going to take a break and we will come back at 3:15, thank you. >> welcome back for the hearing, on january, 31, 2013, for the benefit of the public p at the beginning of the calendar, the beginning of today's hearing, we mentioned that we are moving item 12 to the end of the regular calendar.
2:44 am
since then, there has been a change and i believe that the party's sponsor is requesting a continuance to february 28th. in light of that we will take up that matter of the continuance now. >> commissioner, i would move to continue the item to february 28th, i understand that the concerned parties and project sponsor have agreed. >> second. >> second. >> we will move to public comment. is there any public comment on this item proposed for continuance. only on the continuance n >> that is correct. >> not on the project itself. >> if you are ready sir. >> please remember that the
2:45 am
public comment for this item is only to the continuance of the item not the project itself. >> so i apologize if i am confused, can i speak on this you, how does it work? >> well the project sponsor has proposed to continue the item. so it will be moved to february 28th. and so this portion of the public comment period is just peeking to the continuance, not the project itself. >> okay. >> so i can't speak right now. >> right. >> i understand, i am trying to clarify. >> speak to the project you need to come back on february 28th. >> thank you. >> other mic. >> my name is danny and i am the legislative aid to subpoena supervisor kim who was actually unable to make it to this meeting. she prepared a statement for me. it does talk about the projects
2:46 am
but also the community process that we wanted to go through. as the extensive community has showed up in numbers in opposition to this project. we are optimistic given a one month continuance that we will be able to resolve a lot of the situations. the conversation has begun and there is a draft mlu in place. and we look forward to continuing the conversation with the project sponsor in order to further develop that mlu into something that the community can be proud of and look forward to having that development as their good neighbor. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, dan fraten in behalf of the project sponsor, we are happy to continue working with the neighborhood and supervisor kim's office. the continuance to february 28th is acceptable and
2:47 am
hopefully we will have fewer people here for public comment when we come back. >> thank you. >> any additional public comment on the continuance? >> >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is angelica with the south market community action network. i thank you for continuing this project in terms of making sure that the community has adequate or enough time to really meet with the developer. i do request that the community is able to speak on this. a lot of the people here today took the time to be here. so even if you limit our speaking to even one minute, i ask of you to let our community speak on this issue and why we are here. as you know this is a development that is the single unit family zone and a lot of us concerned with the stability of the families including
2:48 am
seniors in the neighborhood. so i please, i'm asking to please let us speak, thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> to that, last request, typically when there is a continuance, we don't bring m speak and hers when the item comes back on february 28th you will have an opportunity to speak. in between now and then if you want to submit anything in writing, via e-mail or letter to the commission secretary that would be fantastic. and welcomed. >> commissioners, on the motion to continue, items 12 aand b for case numbers 1211-0038 xvand x for 254th street and request for compliance to conditional use to february 28th. >> commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> borden.
2:49 am
>> aye. >> hillis. >> aye. >> wu. >> aye. >> fong. >> aye. >> sugaya. >> aye. >> that passes. also to continue the variance to february 28th. >> thank you. >> and commissioners, a place under 13 a and b, for case numbers 2012.0083 ecv at grove street and known as parcel h and request for conditional use and request for variances. >> >> good afternoon, fong and the staff, before you is a project
2:50 am
to construct a new mixed building, 34 residential units. >> it is hard to hear you. >> just wait one second until this group... >> thank you. >> before you today is a project that proposes to build a mixed building 34 residential unit, 12025 of ground floor retail and parking spaces on a site that is a surface parking lot. the xhis will be considering requests for a lot exceeding 10,000 square feet. the zone operator will be considering the variances for the usable open space and public ride of way and go into the exposure, the located on parcel h and it is also located in dtc zoning district.
2:51 am
it will range from four to five stories and will be cshaped. the project sight has two straights (inaudible) uses and including the commercial retail space and residential lobby and entries. the units will be offered as condos and offices offered on site. >> the building from east to west to match the respect of the 50 foot projects on the site. the step down in height will allow it to be built in an environment and larger buildings will be along goff street while other s will be located on grove street to the west. the building articulating smaller masses by wave like facades that offer the bay window. and the claims also appear to reduce the apparent scale of
2:52 am
the project and pick up on the rhythms in the environment. the (inaudible) estimate a letter of support for the project. the housing action coalition submitted a letter to circulate and i kirk late that for reference. it was in the residential building located to the project site at 525 gof street. that it will reception of light and air through the openings. (inaudible) the project too tall and the density too high and also have suggested that the community gardener make it preperable to the project. also that the project does not contain enough parking. the market and activity plan encouraging walking and biking and public transit and (inaudible) proposed 0.5 to 1 parking ratio. and the dense mixed used projects to the parcels. >> the city laws do not guarantee the light and air through the property line
2:53 am
openings. and this analysis of the project the staff has found that the project would be respectful of the (inaudible) by proposing a five-story along the larger gof street built environment while putting the four stories adjacent to the smaller context. the c-shaped building has been situated so it has shared the property line walls are located adjacent to the buildings of the property would also mimic the development pattern that features large development of large court yards used for open space. because of the mass and the site of the building has been related to the surrounding development. it recommends that they approve a request for the development of a lot greater than 10,000 square feet. >> the department staff has found many other aspects of the project to be necessary and desirable. we recommend that you approve the project. the project will add 34
2:54 am
dwelling units and a walkable area suit for dense used mix. and will add the (inaudible) corner site and will improve the pedal realm and the project will provide all required bmr units on site in the project fulfills the market and activity plan to focus on the transit and serves the locations. and (inaudible) this concludes my presentation and i will be available for questions and i would like to turn it over to the project sponsor for further comment on the design. >> thank you. >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon, president fong, commissioners. my name is daniel, and i am a principle of (inaudible) development a local firm here in san francisco it is my pleasure to present to you 400 grove street in part of the (inaudible) neighborhood plan. with gdg partners who is co-developing the project with
2:55 am
us, together we have a strong commitment to the (inaudible) neighborhood plan. in addition to the 400 grove street and we are developing 200 projects in the neighborhood and one of which is you approved last september. and all of which we believe will help to fulfill the vision of the neighborhood plan and revitalize the area. >> it is located in the haze valley just three blocks from the project site and our project manager lives in the neighborhood and managed the development of it at 55 page street. as you know 400 grove street was once part of the off-ramp that stretched through blieting the neighborhood and today it serves as a surface parking lot which is not the highest and best use for the urban prop. after purchasing this parcel, we hired (inaudible) of the san francisco based award winning (inaudible) architecture. she has worked with market activity plan to design an outstanding mixed use building
2:56 am
and help to beautify a very busy stretch of the street. it will bring numerous (inaudible) and fulfill the goals. it will take a former freeway site and transform it into a beautiful new landmark building and bring the positive activity to the corners of goff and grove street doner the day and at night. it will boost the local economy and add 34 housing units with a good mix of studios, one and two units with over half suitable for families. it will add 4 bmr units on site to better housing into the community and will limit parking to 0.5 spaces per unit to promote public transportation over vehicles. it will have at least 25 bikes stall to promote modes of transportation and will add a dramatic restaurant space to a prominent corner to activate
2:57 am
the pedestrian realm as well as close an empty stretch of retail. it will be environmentally sensitive by integrating the storm water capbility into the landscape feature of the building. it will create high density housing in a transit rich location that has more than a dozen cities and regional mass transit lines nearby. in terms of out reach, the project enjoys broad support. we have strong letters of support from the neighborhood association and the housing action coalition, and we have the support of our neighbors at 300 across the street. we ask for your support of this project today as recommended by the planning department. we believe that the city can be very proud of this project and the benefits that it will bring to this neighborhood and the elegant statement that it will make on the corner of goff and grove. thank you for your consideration, i am pleased to introduce the architect who will present the design, thank you. >> hello, president fong and
2:58 am
commissioners, we are delighted to be presenting you here this project today. i will go through it kind of quickly, i think that you have gotten a lot of the facts. >> if you could state your name. >> an fugeron. >> any way, we are worked on other parcels actually on the market plan and actually worked on one of the first redevelopment agencies that was parcel a and so we are thrilled to be able to continue to work on goff street and helping to improve that environment. i think that you all know where the site is, this is parcel h, this is one of the last sites that is made available on goff street from the demolition of the freeway. so the important parcels were surrounded by the building by david baker and so we are trying hard to keep up with him. this is parcel h, it is a very funny, kind of site in the
2:59 am
sense that it has a dog like here and i am not going a very good job, this 25 foot by 25 foot dog leg that used to be the rear yard and so we wind up with the funny conditions and because it is the last sight to be put on to this dense block we actually had to work pretty hard to figure out a way to site this building so it mid gated the site and try to safety as many of the problems created by a new infield project. there are as you can tell from this, just the different sort of heights, the limits are happening in the site. our site is bisected in two, facing goff and 60 feet in. and we have a 50 feet height limit and going down grove street by 100 feet we have the 40-foot height limit and so the building will step down as it goes towards grove street and we will use that as a way to sort of engage the buildings on grove which are smaller buildings and one and

tv
[untitled]
February 7, 2013 2:30am-3:00am PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 6, San Francisco 5, Brannan 3, Sugaya 2, The City 2, Antonini 2, Lee 1, Danny 1, Adams 1, San Franciscoan 1, Borden 1, Angelica 1, Ecv 1, Gordon 1, The Ab 1, Goff 1, California 1, Parcel 1, Wu 1, Moore 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 24 (225 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color